quote:

---

While the CRTC's decision to permit Bell's throttling practices is disappointing in the short term - and seems to place Canada on a different track from the U.S. - the decision is not a total loss for net neutrality supporters as the Commission made a clear commitment to addressing the issue of net neutrality and network management in a formal proceeding in July 2009. Indeed, it is important not to lose sight of how much has changed in the past year.

Just over one year, [he] wrote a column noting the need for greater ISP transparency in the wake of Rogers' admission that it engaged in traffic shaping. At the time, net neutrality was viewed as a fringe issue in Canada without much political traction. In the span of 13 months, there has been a major CRTC case, a private member's bill on net neutrality, a rally on Parliament Hill, the emergence of BitTorrent as distribution tool for broadcast content, a more vocal business community supporting net neutrality, and a gradual shift of this issue into the political mainstream. In the United States, the change has been even more dramatic - an FCC ruling on the throttling activities, proposed legislation, the shift of net neutrality to wireless, and a President-elect who has been outspoken on the need to preserve net neutrality.

In other words, today's CRTC decision is not the final word on net neutrality in Canada, but rather the first word on it. The Commission itself has opened the door to broader hearings on the issue next year, which may come alongside the new media hearings that also offer the opportunity to raise net neutrality concerns. Moreover, if the Commission comes to the conclusion that these practices are consistent with current Canadian law, there is the likelihood of growing calls from within Parliament to change the law.

---

The CRTC
What concerns you concerns us

Since the discovery of electromagnetism and the development of its applications leading to the inventions of radio, television and telecommunications, people around the world have been concerned about how best to regulate these resources.

In Canada, we quickly recognized that radio, television and telecommunications should serve the public interest. Our challenge was to create a communications infrastructure to serve a small population distributed over a large territory. We met this challenge, largely due to our ingenuity and our willingness to cooperate with others. Today, our communications infrastructure is considered a model to be emulated. This expertise is also found in Canadian policies and regulations on Broadcasting and Telecommunications. There again, we are considered to be a model.

More precisely, observers wonder how the CRTC manages to supervise and regulate Canadian broadcasting and telecommunications while remaining independent in balancing and serving both public and private sector interests.

If Canada has become a recognised leader in the information and knowledge-based society, it is thanks to you.

Your ideas, your opinions and your comments help us update our policies and procedures and evaluate the performance of the television, radio, cable distribution and telecommunications carriers that we regulate and supervise.

Since what concerns you, concerns the CRTC, here is some information on how to express your opinion, file a complaint or obtain information.

quote:

---

I did the exact same thing. I also specified the CRTC/CAIP thing when I did cancel.

---

“The CAIP complaint is really only the tip of the iceberg,” Mr. von Finckenstein told a telecom conference in June. “Sooner or later - hopefully later - this is going to evolve into a major consultation ... It seems to be inevitable.”